Used Australian F-18s heading to Canada will be a mix of single and dual seat aircraft

Sur le même sujet

• 

  25 octobre 2019 | Local, Naval

  The Global Naval Vessels And Surface Combatants Market 2019-2029

  Summary The global naval vessels and surface combatants market is valued at US$36. 7 billion in 2019, and will grow at a CAGR of 1. 97%, to reach a value of US$44. 6 billion by 2029. New York, Oct. 22, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "The Global Naval Vessels And Surface Combatants Market 2019-2029" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p02275942/?utm_source=GNW The cumulative market for global naval vessels and surface combatants is anticipated to value US$429.8 billion over the forecast period. The demand for naval vessels is anticipated to be driven by high levels of expenditure by emerging economies in the Asia-Pacific region including India and China. The North American region supported by US Navy's multi-year procurement programs, is expected to maintain its leading position globally, exhibiting a steady pace of growth over the forecast period. The global naval vessels and surface combatants market is expected to be led by North America with revenue share of 41.9%. Cumulatively, North America is projected to spend US$180.3 billion on naval vessels and surface combatants over the forecast period. In 2019, regional expenditure is expected to value US$15.1 billion and increase to US$19.0 billion by 2029, growing at a CAGR of 2.32%. Asia-Pacific will follow North America and is expected to account for 26.2% revenue share of the global naval vessels and surface combatants market over the forecast period. Europe is anticipated to be the third-largest market globally with a revenue share of 22.2% over the forecast period, driven by the naval expansion and capability enhancement initiatives undertaken by various countries in the region. With a share of 5.5%, the market for naval vessels and surface combatants in the Middle East is projected to be the fourth largest globally. Frigates is expected to be the largest segment in the naval vessels and surface combatants market during the forecast period. Driven by several high-value procurement programs worldwide including the US Navy's FFG(X) program, Canadian Navy's ‘Canadian Surface Combatant' program, Saudi Navy's Multi-Mission Surface Combatant program, Australian Navy's SEA 5000 (Hunter-class) program and French Navy's Intermediate Frigate (FTI) program among others; the Frigates segment is expected to account for a 28.7% revenue share of the total market over the forecast period. Destroyers segment will follow Frigates segment with 19.6% market share. With 15.1% share, Amphibious Ships segment is anticipated to hold the third position in the global market. The growing demand for Amphibious Ships is primarily attributed to the ongoing initiatives of naval forces to develop relevant sealift capabilities. Light Combat Vessels and Corvettes segments to account for respective shares of 11.8% and 9.3%. Aircraft Carriers will account for a decent share of 8.6% over the next decade. The remaining share of 6.9% will be held by Auxiliary Vessels segment. The report "The Global Naval Vessels And Surface Combatants Market 2019-2029", offers a detailed analysis of the industry, with market size forecasts covering the next ten years. This report will also analyze factors that influence demand for naval vessels, key market trends, and challenges faced by industry participants. In-depth analysis provides - - Market size and drivers: detailed analysis during 2019-2029, including highlights of the demand drivers and growth stimulators.It also provides a snapshot of the spending and modernization patterns of different regions around the world - Recent developments and industry challenges: insights into technological developments and a detailed analysis of the changing preferences of naval vessels and surface combatants segments around the world. It also provides trends of the changing industry structure and the challenges faced by industry participants - Regional highlights: study of the key markets in each region, providing an analysis of the key segments of the market that are expected to be in demand - Major programs: details of the key programs in each segment, which are expected to be executed during 2019-2029 - Competitive landscape and strategic insights: analysis of the competitive landscape of the global market. It provides an overview of key players, together with information regarding key alliances, strategic initiatives and financial analysis Companies mentioned: General Dynamics, Huntington Ingalls Industries, Austal, Naval Group, Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T), Lockheed Martin, Fincantieri SpA, BAE Systems, Hyundai Heavy Industries, Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., Ltd and Abu Dhabi Shipbuilding Scope - The global naval vessels and surface combatants market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 1.97% over the forecast period. - The market consists of seven categories: frigates, destroyers, amphibious ships, light combat vessels, corvettes, aircraft carriers, and auxiliary vessels. - North America will dominate the sector with a share of 26%, followed by Asia-Pacific and Europe. The frigates segment is expected to be the leading segment during the forecast period. Reasons to buy - Determine prospective investment areas based on a detailed trend analysis of the global naval vessels and surface combatants market over the next ten years - Gain in-depth understanding about the underlying factors driving demand for different naval vessels and surface combatants segments in the top spending countries across the world and identify the opportunities offered by each of them - Strengthen your understanding of the market in terms of demand drivers, industry trends, and the latest technological developments, among others - Identify the major channels that are driving the global naval vessels and surface combatants market, providing a clear picture about future opportunities that can be tapped, resulting in revenue expansion - Channelize resources by focusing on the ongoing programs that are being undertaken by the defense ministries of different countries within the global naval vessels and surface combatants market - Make correct business decisions based on thorough analysis of the total competitive landscape of the sector with detailed profiles of the top naval vessels and surface combatants providers around the world which include information about their products, alliances, recent contract wins and financial analysis wherever available. Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p02275942/?utm_source=GNW https://finance.yahoo.com/news/global-naval-vessels-surface-combatants-134956689.html

• 

  19 novembre 2019 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Military Procurement: What the New Cabinet Can Learn From Australia

  By Lee Harding The Liberal government announced its new cabinet on Nov. 20—the very same day the Canadian Global Affairs Institute hosted its annual event on the topic of military procurement. Given that an overhaul in that area is sorely needed, Canada can learn a lot from Australia, Ian Mack wrote in a recent report for the institute. Mack is uniquely qualified to make that assessment, having worked with both governments in their process of awarding contracts for military sea vessels. While he believes both countries had an acceptable result, his report, titled “Another Way to Buy Frigates,” suggests the Canadian approach adds work, balloons costs, and delays success. The re-elected Trudeau government should take note. The Liberals proposed significant changes to Canada's defence procurement system during the election campaign, but it will be a tall order to change this process. The land down under is isolated in a less secure part of the globe, without a nearby superpower like the United States to watch its back. So if Australia is far more diligent about defence than Canada, it might be due to necessity. The last time Canada had a proper and comprehensive white paper on defence was 1994. Australia has had three in the 21st century. Australia's effectiveness goes from the top down, something Canada knows nothing of. As Mack explains, “Canada, uniquely among its allies, has multiple government departments and central agencies significantly involved in the minutiae of its major military procurement projects.” These include Defence; Treasury Board; Finance; Public Services and Procurement; Justice; Innovation, Science and Economic Development—and even more. Meanwhile in Australia, the minister of defence is responsible for all aspects of navy shipbuilding. This includes setting operational and technical requirements, securing funds, developing a plan to benefit domestic industries, and satisfying the legal aspects of procurement. Each country had a project management office of roughly the same size, but Canada's was, frankly, less competent. Australia's office had many knowledgeable contractors working alongside the Department of Defence, whereas Canada's team had many from the public service and armed forces with “little or no applicable experience or knowledge,” according to Mack. “In Canada, significant effort was expended on regular reporting to layers of senior governance,” he says in the report. But it was paperwork and process for its own sake, and impractical in its effect. “Despite the onerous reporting demands, only a few key decisions were rendered and rarely in a timely manner. The opposite was the case in Australia.” In seemingly every aspect of development, Canada made things rigid, complicated, and fragmented, while Australia made them flexible, cohesive, and collaborative. Canada made stand-alone contracts for each sequence of the process. Australia worked with contractors to establish “end-to-end accountability.” Canada's initial request for proposal included hundreds of technical requirements that bidders had to prove. Australia had few mandatory requirements, but worked alongside bidders to explore their respective proposed solutions. In Canada, the intellectual property, liabilities, and insurance requirements were debated at length and only decided hours before the request for proposal was made. Hundreds of criteria got a numerical score, and the sum of all scores won the bid. Canada was “preoccupied” about a public appearance of fairness and avoiding lawsuits. (Nevertheless, the controversy over former Vice-Admiral Mark Norman and complaints from Irving Shipbuilding over the bid for a navy supply vessel shows it failed at this.) Shipbuilders bidding in Australia were confident of a fair system without any of those things. The department did not announce its evaluation criteria, nor was the evaluation report the only factor. Instead, the department stated its objectives and worked collaboratively with three potential bidders in their respective approaches. In Mack's words, this left “the competition to be more about assessing apples, oranges, and bananas” than about tallying up numerical scores. Mack says he could not make the Canadian system work like Australia's because the procurement, request for proposals, and resulting contracts were done outside of the Department of National Defence. At the time, he was “simply unaware of the intricacies of the Australian approach” because he hadn't yet been exposed to it. Regardless, he had already surmised that Canadian bureaucrats “did not want changes to their tried and true ways of doing business” and clung to “adherence to prescriptive and traditional methodologies.” https://www.theepochtimes.com/military-procurement-what-the-new-cabinet-can-learn-from-australia_3150065.html

• 

  11 juillet 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

  RCAF seeks proposals on air weapons range upgrades

  by Chris Thatcher The Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is asking for industry help to develop a road map for the modernization of its fighter aircraft training ranges. Public Services and Procurement Canada on July 8 issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a plan that would capitalize on Live-Virtual-Constructive (LVC) training and experimental environments at the two primary air weapons ranges in Cold Lake, Alta., and Bagotville, Que., as well as other ranges in Gagetown, N.B., Wainwright and Suffield, Alta, and Valcartier, Que., and at the Canadian Forces Maritime Experimental and Test Range in Nanoose Bay, B.C. The Cold Lake Air Weapons Range (CLAWR), in particular, is considered a strategic asset that is vital to RCAF individual and collective training, as well as integrated training with the Canadian Army, Canadian Special Operations Forces Command, and allies. It regularly hosts the multinational Maple Flag exercises. But the ranges were last upgraded almost 20 years ago and no longer provide sufficient representation of current threats or the connectivity to work with advanced next-generation fighter jets. They have also become expensive to maintain. “Obsolescence, threat replication, and other land use stakeholders challenge the CLAWR's current utility to training fighter forces, while its future training environment must enable rehearsing the integration of future capabilities against emerging peer adversaries,” explained Stephan Kummel, director general of Fighter Capability, told Skies in a statement. “The RCAF requires airspace designed for advanced air platforms, target arrays suitable for modern weapons, modern training instrumentation, and low-level communications to monitor and control training, and a selective security classification system to permit challenging simultaneous training at different classification levels so participants can share data within their approved national caveats.” The RFP noted that RCAF investments in various virtual constructive capabilities over the past decades “were delivered through discrete projects where interconnectivity with the spectrum of RCAF LVC capabilities was not a requirement.” As part of the road map, the Air Force is asking industry to “consider” the current modelling and simulation environment, virtual proving grounds, and all current RCAF platform simulators — including an eventual remotely piloted air system — as well as air traffic control, air weapons, and air and space control simulators. The aim is a report that “recommended way forward to modernize the ranges and integrate all RCAF LVC capabilities ... Ranges, simulators and virtual environments need to be developed in a manner that supports collective training, but solutions must also support collective and distributed research and experimentation. The proposed investment strategy for the LVC modernization program must enable a seamless transition of equipment and environments between training and force development activities,” according to the RFP. The 12-month contract, which includes a one-year optional extension, is divided into three phases: initial scoping, design and lifecycle support. The initial scoping report is expected to identify shortfalls in “critical range infrastructure such as: threat replication, briefing and de-briefing capability and facilities, communication, Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation (ACMI), EM spectrum management, A/G target design, specialist support personnel and security.” “This roadmap is the first step in a multi-stage process that will ensure the long-term viability of force generation efforts, training, testing and evaluation, and the execution of large-scale multinational exercises such as Maple Flag,” said Kummel. https://www.skiesmag.com/news/rcaf-seeks-proposals-on-air-weapons-range-upgrades/